MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388537981 · doi:10.18280/jesa.560501

Application of Ant Colony Optimization for Job Shop Scheduling in the Pharmaceutical Industry

2023· article· en· W4388537981 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Nadia Lachtar, Imen Driss

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal Européen des Systèmes Automatisés · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicScheduling and Optimization Algorithms
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnt colony optimization algorithmsANTJob shop schedulingJob shopScheduling (production processes)Operations researchIndustrial engineeringComputer scienceManufacturing engineeringBusinessOperations managementEngineeringFlow shop schedulingArtificial intelligenceOperating systemSchedule

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Scheduling problems in the industrial sector are among the most studied optimization problems.Improving resource efficiency and minimizing production costs have become important concerns for industry managers.Seeking the best way to maximize profit is now a primary objective for any business.This is the context in which our study is positioned.It focuses on the resolution of job shop scheduling problems (JSSP).Considering that production challenges in industries are complex and require the consideration of multiple factors, we turn to the use of artificial intelligence tools for their resolution.Pharmaceutical manufacturing often involves a large number of resources, machines, and tasks, leading to high complexity in the JSSP.Ant colony optimization (ACO) is innovative and excels in its ability to handle this complexity by seeking optimal solutions while avoiding computational pitfalls.It can efficiently explore vast search spaces and leverage ant parallelism to reach the best solution in a short period of time, which is crucial in the pharmaceutical context where deadlines and quality constraints are paramount.Thus, in order to address the JSSP, this work suggests and puts into practice a method that involves the application of an ACO approach with the goal of minimizing the makespan.We validated our approach by comparing it with various algorithms through benchmarks taken from the published research.The suggested approach proved to be effective as the produced solutions were of high quality and showed that it could achieve results that are closer to the ideal solution for larger-scale issues than other algorithms with an average percentage relative error of just 0.67%.Furthermore, application of ACO in the context of BIOCARE's pharmaceutical laboratories' production led to an improvement of approximately 3 hours in their weekly planning.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.031
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.269 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal Européen des Systèmes AutomatisésSame topicScheduling and Optimization AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207